New Historicists & Historical Advocates: The Continuing Controversy of Sir Thomas More
Patrick Midgley
Abstract
In 2011, The Arden Shakespeare published an edition of Sir Thomas More as part of its Shakespeare series for the first time. John Jowett, professor at The Shakespeare Institute and editor of the Arden edition, argued in his introduction that More belongs in Shakespeare’s canon by virtue of the new vision the play provides of both Shakespeare-as-collaborator and of the fluid processes of collaboration, revision, and censorship which early modern playwrights faced. But the story of its 21st-century inclusion in the canon also reveals an unprecedented modern phenomenon: the creation of a “new” Shakespeare role by a modern actor.
In this paper, I will investigate both Jowett’s editorial project for the Arden series and McKellen’s subsequent public appearances to argue that Jowett’s edition of Sir Thomas More and McKellen’s interpretation of the play are at odds: where Jowett stresses that a complex relationship between collaborators and a censor required Shakespeare to present More as an advocate for authority, McKellen presents the play as an example of Shakespeare’s personal belief in the importance of tolerance and humanitarianism. In so doing, I will shed light on the dangers of speaking on behalf of Shakespeare’s personal character or of using his plays to speak to current events. Additionally, I will argue that our relationship with Shakespeare is becoming more apocryphal as public figures use Shakespeare’s character or plays as credentialing agents for their personal or political agendas, rather than seek a clear picture of the historical forces that shaped his works.
In 2011, The Arden Shakespeare published an edition of Sir Thomas More as part of its Shakespeare series for the first time. John Jowett, professor at The Shakespeare Institute and editor of the Arden edition, argued in his introduction that More belongs in Shakespeare’s canon by virtue of the new vision the play provides of both Shakespeare-as-collaborator and of the fluid processes of collaboration, revision, and censorship which early modern playwrights faced. But the story of its 21st-century inclusion in the canon also reveals an unprecedented modern phenomenon: the creation of a “new” Shakespeare role by a modern actor.
In this paper, I will investigate both Jowett’s editorial project for the Arden series and McKellen’s subsequent public appearances to argue that Jowett’s edition of Sir Thomas More and McKellen’s interpretation of the play are at odds: where Jowett stresses that a complex relationship between collaborators and a censor required Shakespeare to present More as an advocate for authority, McKellen presents the play as an example of Shakespeare’s personal belief in the importance of tolerance and humanitarianism. In so doing, I will shed light on the dangers of speaking on behalf of Shakespeare’s personal character or of using his plays to speak to current events. Additionally, I will argue that our relationship with Shakespeare is becoming more apocryphal as public figures use Shakespeare’s character or plays as credentialing agents for their personal or political agendas, rather than seek a clear picture of the historical forces that shaped his works.
| etudesjan2018midgley.pdf |
